Dialogue

[merrylander]

Oui Msieu Poirot.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Actually, my point wasn't that our Departed Brethren of The Right had been driven off or even that they simply tired of the debate. You'd think that "debate fatigue" would have a pretty much non-partisan manifestation, that essentially as many on the Left as on the Right would have succumbed. Moreover, what we've seen is a complete flip in the composition of this board. What started out as a predominantly Right Wing group is now mostly made up of people on the Left. If anyone was to be driven away, it would have been the Lefties, right from the get-go.

What I believe has happened is that the Right is no longer interested in dialogue or debate. They believe that the Left has nothing to say that they want to hear, that they have no ideas worthy of consideration or that we should even be recognized as participants in the governing of this country.

Listen to Sarah Palin talk about "the real America" or Glenn Beck telling the faithful that Democrats want to turn America into their vision of a '"socialist utopia". Listen to FOX News warning us about all these scary black people like Van Jones or Ben Jealous or Shirley Sherrod or ACORN and hear our own elected representatives saying that "Liberals" are a greater danger to America than al Qaeda is. See Tea Party rally participants carrying assault weapons or maybe just brandishing signs that say "We Came Unarmed - This Time". Does it seem like these people are interested in any form of consensus - to say nothing of accommodation - with their political opponents? They don't want to convince us. They want to get rid of us.

John

I think you are correct. It's a cultural thing within the parties.
People on the left do not support talk radio or left wing political tv. It's just not part of the culture to reinforce the dogma as it is with the right.
Clearly the GOP is the party of the insecure.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Boreas

What I believe has happened is that the Right is no longer interested in dialogue or debate. They believe that the Left has nothing to say that they want to hear, that they have no ideas worthy of consideration or that we should even be recognized as participants in the governing of this country.

Listen to Sarah Palin talk about "the real America" or Glenn Beck telling the faithful that Democrats want to turn America into their vision of a '"socialist utopia". Listen to FOX News warning us about all these scary black people like Van Jones or Ben Jealous or Shirley Sherrod or ACORN and hear our own elected representatives saying that "Liberals" are a greater danger to America than al Qaeda is. See Tea Party rally participants carrying assault weapons or maybe just brandishing signs that say "We Came Unarmed - This Time". Does it seem like these people are interested in any form of consensus - to say nothing of accommodation - with their political opponents? They don't want to convince us. They want to get rid of us.

John

Bingo!

And, I'll add that I find it extremely disheartening to note that the Democratic Party doesn't seem to get this at all. That the "new" opposition, this most recent and developing Republican Party is not interested in debate, they are after single party rule. It's reached the point that many "moderate" Republicans are being purged. Many in the base have become paranoid and obssessed. Both parties have such people but the growth of extremism on the right is alarming, IMO. So many are looking at Obama and worrying about "totalitarianism" and the formation of a police state. Disagree if you will, but I think that when push comes to shove it will be the right that shoots first. Literally. And the signs of that are already evident.

Dave

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by noonereal

Clearly the GOP is the party of the insecure.

On its face, this sounds rather pompous and dismissive. Whaddya know? It's true.

http://hotair.cachefly.net/media.mic...entation-1.pdf

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

On its face, this sounds rather pompous and dismissive. Whaddya know? It's true.

http://hotair.cachefly.net/media.mic...entation-1.pdf

Berkeley!

Yeah, I remember when that study came out. It did so at about the same time that John Dean's book "Conservatives Without Conscience" came out. Dean talks about some of the same kinds of personality traits that predispose one to Conservatism.

John

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Berkeley!

Yeah, I remember when that study came out. It did so at about the same time that John Dean's book "Conservatives Without Conscience" came out. Dean talks about some of the same kinds of personality traits that predispose one to Conservatism.

John

Hmmm....

Conservatism in the old Soviet Union typically meant hauling your political opponents off to Siberia, or killing them, whichever was easier.

Conservatism in the United States typically means fidelity to the original intent of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, individual liberty versus domination by the collective, etc.

Which version of Conservatism are you referring to?

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

That the "new" opposition, this most recent and developing Republican Party is not interested in debate, they are after single party rule. It's reached the point that many "moderate" Republicans are being purged.

Dave

they purged me a decade ago when boy george hit the stage

I still vote in their primaries however, that's gotta hurt!

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by whell

Conservatism in the United States typically means fidelity to the original intent of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, individual liberty versus domination by the collective, etc.

let me introduce you to dick cheney and friends


you think Sarah is a strict constitutional?

seriously?

BTW isn't "strict constitutional' short hand for fear of change?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Hmmm....

Conservatism in the old Soviet Union typically meant hauling your political opponents off to Siberia, or killing them, whichever was easier.

Conservatism in the United States typically means fidelity to the original intent of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, individual liberty versus domination by the collective, etc.

Which version of Conservatism are you referring to?

Good ol' 'Merkin Conservatism. The Block's study asked their subjects (Americans) questions that were related to political and social issues that were decidedly American in nature. So too, Dean's book focused on the American Conservative movement (or American Movement Conservatives )

As to your definitions of Soviet vs. American Conservatives, well, I guess the less said the better.

Did you read the study, by the way?

John

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Conservatism in the United States typically means fidelity to the original intent of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, individual liberty versus domination by the collective, etc.

Which version of Conservatism are you referring to?

More glittering generalities that seem to hold true to form:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread595311/pg1

I think it boils down to fear of change and insecurity when faced with unknown, either here or the USSR.

As far as conservatives holding the original intent of the Constitution more dear, I agree that this represents the conventional wisdom. In practice, I'm not so sure.